Thread: For Rich -- how are you surviving the state wide "lockdown"

Originally Posted by damian

CNN ? Fake news!

Just remember you got Trump because of Hilary. If the democrats had fielded an electable candidate they would have won at a canter. How utterly deluded do you have to be to stand up at a podium in the middle of an election and call the electorate a basket of deplorables ?

I guess it's all just symptom of how stupid the electorate and how far politics has fallen...next it'll be Paris Hilton running against Rosanne Barr...

At the annual Christmas gathering 2016, my oldest son (To be 51 this year) and I got into it over Trump / Hillary. (Remember he is the one that refused to take UCLA tuition money from me because "I don't want to be controlled by you." You can not imagine how difficult it was to exit that conversation without bursting out laughing.) I told him that I voted for the Libertarian candidate. To that he blew up and retorted "I voted for Hillary and I'm proud of it." When I said Hillary is the reason that we have Trump for president, he blew up and had to go outside for a walk to calm down.

So here we are almost 4 years later and someone from half way around the planet so accurately understands the stupidity of the American electorate. I congratulate you for that.

Thanks but it's the same all over. Politics is REALLY simple. The problem is the people who are into it overthink it.

Republicans will always vote for the republican candidate, democrats the democrat candidate. Doesn't matter if they are a pedophile they will still get that vote. Elections are won and lost by swing voters/moderates in marginal jurisdictions. These people are only about 4 - 8% of the population. There are of course more of them across the country (your country or mine) but only about 1/3 of jurisdictions are ever in play.

So to understand who will win an election you just have to understand these people. The left are systematically losing power throughout the western world because over the last decade or so their demands have become ever more unreasonable, their protests more shrill. They, like the extreme right, have withdrawn into echo chambers and become ever more overtly extreme and intolerant. When HC made that speech she was playing to her base. She had completely forgotten that her base don't matter and that she had to hold on the the center to win. She committed one of the cardinal sins of campaigning, she attacked the electorate. Even if a moderate doesn't think the comment is directed at them, calling any group of electors worthless, inferior etc makes you a non option.

I watched what friends (rational people) in the USA were putting on the interweb while that election developed. It was fascinating. So many were lamenting they had no one to vote for, but when she said that the mood turned instantly.

She thought she couldn't lose. Labor in australia thought that at the last election and campaigned on new taxes. Their much hated leader didn't help but they really presented an un-electable proposal. They thought they had it in the bag.

This isn't helped by hopelessly broken polling. The pollsters are not accounting for sample bias properly. Conservatives, and quite a few moderates, won't engage with them anymore so their samples are overwhelmingly left leaning. This leads the left to false hope before elections.

I'm seeing a swing to the right throughout society. It's been developing for a while. Unfortunately it's already ugly and will get worse. I'm a moderate, I don't like either extreme, but the middle just doesn't seem to be an option...

Originally Posted by damian

I'm seeing a swing to the right throughout society. It's been developing for a while. Unfortunately it's already ugly and will get worse. I'm a moderate, I don't like either extreme, but the middle just doesn't seem to be an option...

I was joking with my son just before the last election. An interesting party called FLUX asked me to run/organise the electorate for here (I had to decline). The idea is absolutely brilliant.

As an IT guy, AI enthusiast, libertarian and anarchist* it seemed very good.

When AI kicks in, this is how it will be. The party system will be destroyed (good) and The People will finally get a word in (yay).

We joked about starting a party called "No" or None-Of-The-Above. The candidates would veto all legislation, block every bill, frustrate every process, kill anything that can be killed, rip up rules, rip up bureaucracy and attempt to poison the entire system from within. The mandate was simple, one rule.... "No". The answer would ALWAYS be no. No to anything and everything.

The idea interested me



* Freedom OF/FROM big government type, not pitchforks in the streets kind.

Originally Posted by damian

Elections are won and lost by swing voters/moderates in marginal jurisdictions. These people are only about 4 - 8% of the population.

Completely agreed Damian. It was well demonstrated that SmirKo's mob completely understood the principle with their Sports Rorts Pork Barrelling. The money only went to marginal electorates (of either flavour), where the swing voters can actually make that difference.

A couple of points to make though:
1. non-compulsory voting in the USA really throws a spanner in the works because I suspect that many of the swing voters might just stay at home, particularly because...
2. ....their elections go for sooooo long that they must surely get election fatigue
3. The Electoral College appears to be completely undemocratic. Dumb as she might have been, HC still had 3mill more votes than Trumpwit. That's the same effect as a nationwide gerrymander.

You'd have to think that the voters that swung over to Trumpwit in 2016 would now largely desert him - he was all talk before the election - but he still is only talk. Never seen anyone talk so much about themselves and how outstanding they are, in the face of the brutal reality that they are not!

Time will tell of course. Just because (supposedly) 60% of Americans approve of his crisis handling so far does not mean his luck will last once the poo REALLY starts hitting the fan in a week or two. I wonder where that sample was taken. Couldn't have been many NY or Weezyanna folks in it....

Your prejudices are showing, you might want to tuck those back in. Calling people names isn't clever. politicians are not the problem, they are a symptom. The electorate who put them there is the problem.

Do you honestly think the coalition at the last election invented pork barreling ? Lord knows I remember the disgraceful carry on in the Hawke years.

But you have overlooked a far bigger factor. Australians NEVER vote governments in, they vote them out. Whitlam lost the 75 election in teh biggest landslide in Australia's federal history. Fraser was the most hated man in Australia yet the electorate gave him 75% of the seats in the lower house because Whitlam had made such a monumental f'up of government the people were actually afraid of how much worse it could get. In 83 with Whitlam finally well and truly gone Fraser's boat people policies p'd enough people off to give Hawke a go. He tortured us from day 1 but teh coalition, specifically Howard and Peakcock, ensured the coalition were utterly unelectable. Finally in 96 the put forward an electable proposition and Keating was out on his ear for all the sins he'd committed. In 07 Howard's government went mad particularly with their industrial relations reforms and people took a punt on Kevin07. Despite the cataclysm of the Rudd/Gillard years people were more scared of an Abbott government than Gillard so she scraped through on a lie and Abbott made sure second time around to put the stake right through the heart.

There was no such chaos last election. Morrison didn't have to do anything except avoid scandal, media fodder. He shut them down and made himself the single line of communication. Meanwhile every time Shorten put his face in front of a camera labors hopes sank, but they really put the knife to their own throats with their economic package. Morrison won because there was no good reason to chuck him out and the alternative looked heaps worse. Simplz.

As for Trump, he is the opposite of Obama, and will have a much more favorable legacy because of it. Presidents have 2 jobs. 1 is the pr side, setting the mood of the nation. Obama was great, Trump is terrible. The second is getting legislation through and actually doing the administration. Obama will be remembered as a do nothing president, and what he did do was disastrous. Trump will be remembered for achieving more of his campaign promises than any president in recent history. Sure I don't like his agenda, but he went to the election with a laundry list (which Obama didn't) and he has bullied kicked and stabbed his way through it. He achieved more in the first 2 years than Obama did in 8.

Non compulsory voting does complicate things slightly, but only because sometimes if they care enough the 4th group bother to turn up. Fact is left leaning are the more likely to stay home with non mandatory voting, always has been. Lately there is a trend for younger voters not to bother.

The electoral college is a gerymander, always has been. Republicans have always needed less than half the votes to win. Doesn't matter. you might as well complain about mandatory preferential voting. reminds me of racers telling stories of how they would have won if only the wheel hadn't fallen off on the last lap. Fact is if the voting is that close the people do not endorse either candidate overwhelmingly. Imagine if Gore had won against Bush! FFS....do you really think the Americans, or us for that matter, would have been better off with that *** running the show ?

Trump will win this year. No doubt about it. Unless he does something absolutely catastrophic he will win comfortably. In fact I can just about spell out the campaign for you...

Moderates don't drop out because of campaign fatigue. They mostly don't tune in until a week before the election, check which side has the biggest barrel or pork and vote accordingly.

Woodpixel: Philosophically I am with you but AI will f the lot of us, it won't make anything better. I suggest reading about the Athenian empire. People like to BS that it fell because it was a popular democracy, but actually it's spectacular rise and fall was for exactly the same reasons representative democracies do well and poorly. It's valuable because they are sufficiently remote that we can view them somewhat objectively.

I have a far more basic approach. Most of what the government does harms us. I always vote for minor parties and independents, doesn't really matter who. If enough people do this they get the balance of power. This slows down the government. The more time they spend fighting among themselves the less they have to f us over. The best we can hope for. The most dangerous times for us federally are when the government hold majorities in both houses. Hung senates are there to save us from their excesses.

I must go look and see who won my council ward yesterday...

I have a far more basic approach. Most of what the government does harms us. I always vote for minor parties and independents, doesn't really matter who. If enough people do this they get the balance of power. This slows down the government. The more time they spend fighting among themselves the less they have to f us over. The best we can hope for. The most dangerous times for us federally are when the government hold majorities in both houses. Hung senates are there to save us from their excesses.

Pretty much my political philosophy. It doesn't matter who gets in, as long as they only just get in. This applies to individual candidates and parties. Also, I vote for independents as long as they aren't complete nutters, in the hope that it will eventually encourage someone like Ted Mack or John Hatton to stand and get in.

Originally Posted by damian

Australians NEVER vote governments in, they vote them out.

Fair point.

I have never voted for somebody: Only against, which means default to the alternative: Fundamental problem is that there is a distinct dearth of talent out there amongst all political parties. In particular we need some honourable men or women. Where is that Brutus fellow when you need him?

Oh, that's right, wiping the knife clean .

Regards
Paul

Are you honourable enough to stand?

Ray

Who? Me?

Nah. See my catch phrase at the foot. Perhaps everybody goes that way eventually and it is just a case of how long it takes to get there. People begin to believe their own lies and self importance.

What did I hear you say? ....A little bit cynical . The reality is that if you put up your hand for politics you are under scrutiny and you should perform. Fall down for any reason and you are out.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by damian

I always vote for minor parties and independents, doesn't really matter who. If enough people do this they get the balance of power. This slows down the government. The more time they spend fighting among themselves the less they have to f us over. The best we can hope for. The most dangerous times for us federally are when the government hold majorities in both houses. Hung senates are there to save us from their excesses.

Originally Posted by AlexS

Pretty much my political philosophy. It doesn't matter who gets in, as long as they only just get in. This applies to individual candidates and parties. Also, I vote for independents as long as they aren't complete nutters, in the hope that it will eventually encourage someone like Ted Mack or John Hatton to stand and get in.

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

I have never voted for somebody: Only against, which means default to the alternative: Fundamental problem is that there is a distinct dearth of talent out there amongst all political parties. In particular we need some honourable men or women. Where is that Brutus fellow when you need him?

you do realise that with Australia's compulsory preferential system of voting your vote is ultimately going to one of the two major parties? At present I think there are but two (out of 151) House of Reps members who are truly independent. Wilkie in Tasmania and ?? in Indi (Victoria). Zali Stegal (did I spell her name correctly) is really a middle ground liberal compared to Tony Abbott.
(It's one of the reasons the Electoral Commission reports the two party preferred outcome.)

I understand the voting system but you are't quite right anymore. They changed the federal senate so you only have to vote for X number of candidates then your vote can expire. So you have that option. We had partial preferential in queensland for a while, and we had partial preferential in the council elections last weekend. Also it is not publicized but if you get a certain number right then spoil the rest of the ballot the first few preferences are in fact counted, the vote is not discarded. So if you have 9 options you can vote say 1-7 then mark the last couple 8 or whatever and the first numbers will count. Mind I'm explaining the system. It would be illegal for me to suggest anyone deliberately spoil their ballot.

We have rubbish candidates because we treat them like rubbish. The electorate behave like spoiled brats the whole time. Why would any decent person put themselves up for that ? The media invade your privacy looking for a scandal and the public just whinge you aren't giving them enough for nothing.

I also like to point out that in the 60's the PM got 1.5 times the average salary, now it's 6 times. People who argue pay peanuts get monkey are arguing that the politicians we have today are 4X better than those in the 60's. Anyone want to take up that argument ?

I believe the high salaries have a detrimental effect. They give the incumbent a sense of superiority and entitlement. I believe if the salary was set in the constitution as a low multiple of the national average we would get BETTER candidates.

It doesn't matter if the independents are nutters, they don't have enough power to put the country off the rails. They are disrupters, and nutters are good disrupters

I'm still waiting for the "surface to surface missiles on your roofrack" party. They get my vote...fn brisbane drivers....

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

I have never voted for somebody: Only against, which means default to the alternative:

Has anybody worked out a way to vote against ALL of the f/w pollies.

Originally Posted by Bohdan

Has anybody worked out a way to vote against ALL of the f/w pollies.

Now there is a thought. Some elections might end up, "there was not a suitable candidate this time so we didn't appoint anybody."

Umm.. That might be most elections.

Regards
Paul

you do realise that with Australia's compulsory preferential system of voting your vote is ultimately going to one of the two major parties?

Yes, I understand that that's the way the system works, but as the saying goes, they can screw you, but they can't make you love the child.

Damian, it is indeed illegal to encourage anyone not to complete all squares on their ballot paper, but if anyone wishes to read how this can be done and still have a vote count, I suggest casting a glance at the case of Langer v the Commonwealth. Not that I would suggest that anyone do this, of course, as Mr. Langer found out.